Members of City Council, Planning Commission, and the Board of Adjustment and Appeals are often approached outside the public hearing process by applicants, neighbors, or other interested parties who wish to share information, or express concerns about a pending planning application. While well intentioned, these interactions raise important legal and ethical issues when the planning application will eventually be discussed in a quasi-judicial hearing.

Quasi-judicial matters require decision-makers to follow due-process principles to ensure fairness, transparency, and impartiality. Ex Parte communications can compromise the integrity of the decision-making process.

What “Quasi-Judicial” Means in Planning

There are three main types of decisions made by City Council, Planning Commission, and the Board of Adjustment and Appeals: legislative, administrative, and quasi-judicial.  Legislative decisions are those to adopt, amend, or repeal a law or regulation affecting the City as a whole. Amendments to the comprehensive plan and updates to the zoning code are examples of legislative decisions. Administrative decisions are typically made on staff-level to implement legislation. Examples include certain Site Improvement Plan Amendments, Building Permits, and Certificates of Occupancy.

Quasi-judicial decisions are decisions made following a public hearing where decisions are based on established criteria. These hearings are “court-like.”

In Lone Tree, the following planning items are generally reviewed and considered:

• Quasi-judicial applications, such as:
  • Variances (often in an advisory or recommending role)
  • Special or conditional use permits
  • Preliminary Plans and Subdivision plats
  • Certain site-specific rezonings
  • Development/redevelopment proposals

Key features of quasi-judicial decisions:

• Fair process (due process): All parties must receive notice and be allowed to present testimony and evidence at a public hearing.
• Impartial decision-makers: Councilmembers, Commissioners and board members must remain neutral and open-minded until all evidence is heard.
• Decisions based on the record: The final decision must rely only on information presented during the public hearing; not on private conversations, or outside research. (Note that written communications submitted to the City while a project is actively under review by the City do become part of the official project record. Such comments are included in the hearing agenda packet presented to the public and are reviewed by the City Council, Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment and Appeals, as applicable.)

What Are Ex Parte Communications

An Ex Parte communication is any discussion—oral, written, or electronic—between a decision-maker that is involved in a pending quasi-judicial case and any other person that happens outside the public hearing.

Examples include:

• A phone call from an applicant explaining why their project should be approved.
• An email from a neighbor opposing a variance.
• A private meeting or site visit where case details are discussed.
• A social media post to which a decision maker actively engages in communication about the pending application.

Why Ex Parte Communications Are a Concern

Ex parte communications undermine the fairness of the process because other parties do not have a chance to hear the information or respond to it. This can raise concerns about bias and can put the final decision at legal risk.

Key concerns include:

• Lack of transparency: Information shared privately is not part of the public record.
• Unfair advantage: One party may influence the decision without accountability.
• Legal vulnerability: Decisions can be appealed or overturned if due-process violations are found.

Avoiding Ex Parte communications protects the integrity of the planning process. It ensures decisions are made openly, based on evidence, and with equal treatment for all parties. Just as importantly, it helps maintain public confidence that planning decisions are fair, unbiased, and lawful.